Learn from US mistakes

America’s Iraq, Pakistan failures should prompt reassessment of Hamas policy

Efraim Halevy|Published: 12.31.07 , 17:07

Benazir Bhutto’s assassination did not surprise anyone. She predicted her own demise and spoke about it in talks she held and messages she conveyed since her return to Pakistan. She also pointed to the person who would be responsible for the murder: President Musharraf.

The return of the former Pakistani prime minister to her country and her re-election bid were initiated, planned, and executed by the American Administration, which decided that such move would be the proper cure for the ills of Pakistan, which has found itself embroiled in a series of internal crises.

The American failure is the third of its type in recent years. At the end of the Iraq war and after Saddam Hussein was toppled, the US sought to establish a new order in Iraq and granted the Shiite majority effective control over the country in conjunction with the Kurdish minority. The Sunni minority, which was in power up until then, was given a secondary role in government.

This policy failed. The wave of terror across Iraq and the activity of al-Qaeda members forced Washington to change direction, go back to the Sunnis, which were rejected only yesterday, and arm them, so that they fight the Shiites and al-Qaeda. The Sunni success of recent months enabled President Bush to point to substantial achievements in decreasing the level of violence in Iraq.

The Second American failure was forcing Israel to enable Hamas to take part in the Palestinian general elections of 2006. The Hamas victory surprised the Americans, who recently declared a “war” on Hamas. The organization has indeed sustained harsh blows delivered by Israel, yet even the most optimistic figures within our defense establishment do not predict the movement’s elimination in the current round of fighting.

The three above-mentioned examples, Pakistan, Iraq, and Palestinians, play a major role n the balance of interests between the US and Iran. On top of that we should add Afghanistan: The war waged there by the US and NATO against the Taliban is entering its seventh year, yet we have seen no victory yet.

Long-term ceasefire?

Iran holds special weight both in the Pakistani theater and in the adjacent Afghani arena. The US and Iran have very similar interests in both those arenas and they are expected to tighten the cooperation between them in order to prevent the collapse of the regimes in those countries. Benazir Bhutto’s death will accelerate this trend. In Iraq, Iran has made a substantial and significant contribution to the decline in the level of violence. American spokespeople are saying this openly and praising Teheran.

It certainly looks like the common agenda of Iran and the US is growing bigger, parallel to the escalating conflict between them over Teheran’s nuclear plans.

In the near future, we can expect to hear growing calls in Washington for direct dialogue with Iran on all issues. The Iran dialogue feelers put out by Saudi Arabia and Egypt in the last two weeks signal to President Bush that the international coalition against Ahmadinejad is starting to see the weakening of some of its essential components, particularly among moderate Arab states. This is yet another good reason to reexamine America’s overall policy vis-à-vis Iran.

These developments do not bode well for Israel, and we should hope that our leaders are looking into the wisdom of maintaining the uncompromising stance vis-à-vis Hamas. This is the last arena where the US assessment was proven false, and just as America was able to completely change course in Iraq when it realized its mistake, we should hope that it would be wise enough to re-examine the Hamas case as well. If Hamas is ready for a long-term ceasefire, perhaps it would be wise to exhaust this option before continuing in the current path of unconditional war.

Benazir Bhutto’s assassination illustrates that American-made solutions for the problems of distant countries, and particularly Muslim ones, repeatedly fail. We have little time left for a change of direction on the Gaza front. This challenge is at our doorstep – here and now. Shouldn’t this be the first item on the agenda of President Bush and Prime Minister Olmert during their upcoming meeting?